The Morphogenic Society as Source and Challenge for Human Fulfillment

  • Andrea M. MaccariniEmail author
Part of the Social Morphogenesis book series (SOCMOR)


The chapter addresses the problem of what specific conditions the morphogenic society (MS) sets for the hopes and meanings of human flourishing. It is argued that the MS presents some major challenges, summarized as (i) the explosion of the possibilities for action and experience; (ii) social acceleration, and (iii) the saturation of social space. These result in a deep pressure on the human being and in a crisis of the ‘exonerating’ function of institutions. The corresponding, emergent needs are (a) self-empowerment; (ii) durable attachment and cooperation; (iii) a renewed sense of transcendence. This chapter shows that such a societal constellation disrupts the modern ‘compromise of happiness’, calling radically into question personal and collective identities. The hopes for authentic human fulfillment depend on precarious social and cultural dynamics, which can be understood through the guiding distinctions of flourishing/calling and flourishing/enhancement.


Morphogenic society Human flourishing Social acceleration Compromise of happiness Human fulfillment 


  1. Archer, M. S. (1988). Realist social theory. The morphogenetic approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Archer, M. S. (2000). Being human. The problem of agency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Archer, M. S. (2003). Structure, agency and the internal conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Archer, M. S. (2012). The reflexive imperative in late modernity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Archer, M. S. (Ed.). (2013). Social morphogenesis. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  6. Archer, M. S. (Ed.). (2014). Late modernity. trajectories towards morphogenic society. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  7. Arnason, J. P. (1993). The future that failed. Origins and destinies of the soviet model. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Bellah, R. N., & Joas, H. (Eds.). (2012). The axial age and its consequences. Cambridge, MA/London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Blumenberg, H. (1986). Lebenszeit und Weltzeit. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  10. Donati, P. (2010). La matrice teologica della società. Soveria Mannelli: Rubbettino.Google Scholar
  11. Ehrenberg, A. (2010). La société du malaise. Paris: Odile Jacob.Google Scholar
  12. Eisenstadt, S. N. (2000). Multiple modernities. Daedalus, 129(1), 1–29.Google Scholar
  13. Esping Andersen, G. (2002). Towards the good society, once again? In his. (with D. Gallie, A. Hemerijck, J. Miles). Why we need a new welfare state (pp. 1–25). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Ferguson, N. (2011). Civilization. The West and the rest. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  15. Ferguson, N. (2012). The great degeneration. How institutions decay and economies die. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  16. Gehlen, A. (2007). Die Seele im technischen Zeitalter. Sozialpsychologische Probleme in der industriellen Gesellschaft (1957). Frankfurt: Klostermann.Google Scholar
  17. Gehlen, A. (2013). Der Mensch. Seine Natur und seine Stellung in der Welt (1940). Graz: AULA-Verlag.Google Scholar
  18. Gergen, K. (1991). The saturated self. Dilemmas of identity in contemporary life. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  19. Gorski, P. (2013). Beyond the fact/value distinction: Ethical naturalism and the social sciences. Society, 50(6), 543–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hartwig, M. (Ed.). (2007). Dictionary of critical realism. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Istat. (2015). BES 2015. Il benessere equo e sostenibile in Italia. Roma: Istituto nazionale di statistica.Google Scholar
  22. Jaspers, K. (1953). The origin and goal of history. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Joas, H. (2008). Do we need religion? On the experience of self-transcendence. Boulder/London: Paradigm Publishers.Google Scholar
  24. Levin, H. (1969). The myth of the golden age in the renaissance. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Maccarini, A. (2010). Il prisma della religione: mediazioni, ri-velazioni e controversie nella società globale. In D. Arasa & J. Milàn (Eds.), Communication, the church, and the culture of controversies (pp. 107–164). Roma: Edusc.Google Scholar
  26. Maccarini, A. (2014). The emergent social qualities of a ‘morphogenic’ society. Cultures, structures, and forms of reflexivity. In M. S. Archer (Ed.), Late modernity. Trajectories towards morphogenic society (pp. 49–76). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  27. Maccarini, A. (2016a). The normative texture of morphogenic society: Tensions, challenges, and strategies. In M. S. Archer (Ed.), Morphogenesis and the crisis of normativity. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  28. Maccarini, A. M. (2016b). On character education: Self-formation and forms of life in a morphogenic society. Italian Journal of Sociology of Education, 8(1), 31–55. doi: 10.14658/pupj-ijse-2016-1-3.Google Scholar
  29. Madsen, R. (2012). The future of transcendence. A sociological agenda. In R. N. Bellah & H. Joas (Eds.), The axial age and its consequences (pp. 430–446). Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Nussbaum, M. C., & Sen, A. (Eds.). (2009). The quality of life. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  31. OECD. (2015a). How’s life? 2015: Measuring well-being. Paris: OECD Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. OECD. (2015b). Skills for social progress: The power of social and emotional skills, OECD skills studies. Paris: OECD Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rizzardi, L. (1984). Il fascino della perfezione: questioni preliminari ad una interpretazione psicologica dei significati politici dell’utopia. In A. Quadrio (Ed.), Aristarchi (a cura di), Questioni di psicologia politica (pp. 171–269). Milano: Giuffrè Editore.Google Scholar
  34. Rosa, H. (2013). Social acceleration. A new theory of modernity. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rosa, H. (2016). Resonanz. Eine Soziologie der Weltbeziehung. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  36. Rossi, P. (1976). Sulle origini dell’idea di progresso. In E. Agazzi (a cura di), Il concetto di progresso nella scienza. Milano: Feltrinelli.Google Scholar
  37. Sandel, M. J. (2009). The case against perfection. Ethics in the age of genetic engineering. Cambridge, MA/London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Sayer, A. (2011). Why things matter to people. Social science, values and ethical life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sennett, R. (2007). The culture of the new capitalism. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Sennett, R. (2012). Together: The rituals, pleasures and politics of cooperation. New York: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
  41. Shulman, D., & Stroumsa, G. G. (Eds.). (2002). Self and self-transformation in the history of religions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Sloterdijk, P. (2013). You must change your life. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  43. Smith, C. (2015). To flourish or destruct. A personalist theory of human goods, motivations, failure, and evil. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Taylor, C. (1991). The ethics of authenticity. Cambridge, MA/London: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Taylor, C. (2007). A secular age. Cambridge, MA/London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Willke, H. (2002). Dystopia. Studien zur Krisis des Wissens in der modernen Gesellschaft. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of PadovaPaduaItaly

Personalised recommendations